Job 22
:3

Job 22 :3
Translations

King James Version (KJV)

Is it any pleasure to the Almighty, that you are righteous? or is it gain to him, that you make your ways perfect?

American King James Version (AKJV)

Is it any pleasure to the Almighty, that you are righteous? or is it gain to him, that you make your ways perfect?

American Standard Version (ASV)

Is it any pleasure to the Almighty, that thou art righteous? Or is it gain to him , that thou makest thy ways perfect?

Basic English Translation (BBE)

Is it of any interest to the Ruler of all that you are upright? or is it of use to him that your ways are without sin?

Webster's Revision

Is it any pleasure to the Almighty, that thou art righteous? or is it gain to him, that thou makest thy ways perfect?

World English Bible

Is it any pleasure to the Almighty, that you are righteous? Or does it benefit him, that you make your ways perfect?

English Revised Version (ERV)

Is it any pleasure to the Almighty, that thou art righteous? or is it gain to him, that thou makest thy ways perfect?

Definitions for Job 22
:3

Art - "Are"; second person singular.

Clarke's Commentary
on Job 22 :3

Is it any pleasure to the Almighty - Infinite in his perfections, he can neither gain nor lose by the wickedness or righteousness of men.

Barnes's Commentary
on Job 22 :3

Is it any pleasure to the Almighty that thou art righteous? - This is the same sentiment which was advanced in the previous verse. The meaning is, that it can be no advantage to God that a man is righteous. He is not dependent on man for happiness, and cannot be deterred from dealing justly with him because he is in danger of losing anything. In this sense, it is true. God "has" pleasure in holiness wherever it is, and is pleased when people are righteous; but it is not true that he is dependent on the character of his creatures for his own happiness, or that people can lay him under obligation by their own righteousness. Eliphaz applies this general truth to Job, probably, because he understood him as complaining of the dealings of God with him, as if he had laid God under obligation by his upright life. He supposes that it was implied in the remarks of Job, that he had been so upright, and had been of so much consequence, that God "ought" to have continued him in a state of prosperity. This supposition, if Job ever had it, Eliphaz correctly meets, and shows him that he was not so profitable to God that he could not do without him. Yet, do people not often feel thus? Do ministers of the gospel not sometimes feel thus? Do we not sometimes feel thus in relation to some man eminent for piety, wisdom, or learning? Do we not feel as if God could not do without him, and that there was a sort of necessity that he should keep him alive? Yet, how often are such people cut down, in the very midst of their usefulness, to show

(1) that God is not dependent on them; and

(2) to keep them from pride, as if they were necessary to the execution of the divine plans; and

(3) to teach his people their dependence on "Him," and not on frail, erring mortals. When the church places its reliance on a human arm, God very often suddenly knocks the prop away.

Wesley's Commentary
on Job 22 :3

22:3 Is it - Such a pleasure as he needs for his own ease and contentment. Nay, God needs not us, or our services. We are undone, forever undone without him: but he is happy, forever happy without us.